A Brevard County man remained in jail late Tuesday, accused of shooting a teenager dead in an argument over loud music.

Michael David Dunn, 45, and his girlfriend were in Jacksonville Friday for Dunn's son's wedding when they stopped at a convenience store, Jacksonville sheriff's Lt. Rob Schoonover said.

Jordan Russell Davis, 17, and several other teenagers were sitting in a sport utility vehicle in the parking lot when Dunn pulled up next to them in a car and asked them to turn down their music, Schoonover said.

Jordan and Dunn exchanged words, and Dunn pulled a gun and shot eight or nine times, striking Jordan twice, Schoonover said. Jordan was sitting in the back seat. No one else was hurt.

Dunn's attorney Monday said her client acted responsibly and in self-defense. She did not elaborate.

Not everything is a “Trayvon Martin”, where the guy is leaped on and is on the ground fighting for his life, and is already bloody and battered as he desperately squeezes off a shot that saves his life.

It isn’t fair to Zimmerman and to extreme self-defense cases, to keep using this “Trayvon” thing so casually and as a catch phrase.

4
posted on 11/27/2012 10:33:00 PM PST
by ansel12
(The only Senate seat GOP pick up was the Palin endorsed Deb Fischer's successful run in Nebraska)

We don’t know what kind of a weapon (if any) Davis pulled on Dunn. Dunn claims self-defense, but the story is silent about what he was defending against Is this silence intended to make the hooded corpse into another supposedly innocent boy victim?

This wasn’t a fact based list, or description, it is just a vague outline of something involving a shooting.

We don’t know squat, so it is too early to be drawing up scenarios, taking sides on various scenarios, and drifting into hardened positions as though we have a side to take, we don’t, we don’t know anything at this point.

But you know how these threads go.

9
posted on 11/27/2012 10:57:33 PM PST
by ansel12
(The only Senate seat GOP pick up was the Palin endorsed Deb Fischer's successful run in Nebraska)

Notice the pleasant, almost smiling demeanor on the victim as compared to the sullen, frowning face of the shooter.

Not to mention the victim's first name being used exclusively in the article while only referencing the shooter by his last name. Pretty easy to see how this story is going to be framed by the MSM........regardless of the facts.

There must be more to the story. Looks like he’s lawyered up for now. His GF was inside the store, so he couldn’t just leave. If he couldn’t shut out most of the noise by just keeping his windows rolled up, it must have been really loud.

I do not understand how this is a Trayvon/Zimmerman ("T/Z") redux. The T/Z case stemmed from Trayvon assaulting Zimmerman to the point that he had to defend himself by shooting Trayvon. While a lot has been made about that case the facts indicate that is was legitimate self defense.

On the other hand, all we have here (based on the facts out so far) is that one person fired at another when words were exchanged due to loud music. I'm sorry, but that has nothing to do with The T/Z scenario unless there are new facts that I haven't seen yet. This looks like a prosecutor's wet dream for murder. Disliking loud music, and a war of words, doesn't give someone the right to take a life.

Now, if it was a shootout, or the black kid drew a weapon on the shooter, that's another kettle of fish. But so far all we have is multiple shots from one person to the other vehicle. It's not looking too good for this guy unless evidence comes out showing it was a legitimate shooting.

Sometimes you go to a convenience store and see something you don’t like in the parking lot. Could be loud music, could be a couple doing a severe make-out session, could be a bunch of louts drinking beer, etc.

So, buy what you came to buy and get out of there. I don’t see an upside to confronting strangers and shooting and killing them over their obnoxious behavior in a parking lot.

Of course it was deafening....enough bass to rattle the store windows. That’s their way; it’s all about them, you see.

See/hear it all the time.

Recently, my lady friend’s boss (they run a security company; he’s a former 30-year detective) pulls into a convenience store, hears the same.....but there’s a little toddler strapped in that vehicle with the windows rolled up, baby mama inside the store. The kid was literally being tortured.

I’ve been waiting for this to happen. This is not merely loud music, This is WAY beyond that. It’s extreme low frequency vibration that carries for blocks. And nobody is doing anything to stop it. Want to see what it looks like? Just google images “Subwoofers in Cars”. I knew somebody was gonna get hurt for this - eventually.

“I never, ever, ever read anything on those sites about the rampant black on white violence.”

That is why I couldn’t care less why this guy shot this kid; let somebody else care. I wouldn’t do it or defend it, but I literally couldn’t care less. It is like reading about 2 life forms on Jupiter battling it out.

I never could understand why these a-holes think other people want tolisten to their sh*tty music, but they play it at deafening volume. It can actually make your car shake sitting next to it at a light.

They get all upset if you ask them to tone it down, like it is a personal insult.

The best thing is to avoid their neighborhoods, but sometimes you cannot. I have found that Bluegrass music played back at them is a bit like shoving a ice pick in their ears.LMAO

I think this is not a Zimmerman matter i.e. where the prosecutor went out of her way to charge a crime where there is not one. Incidentally, she would be the prosecutor in this case too as the incident happened in Duval County.

From what has come out so far, it sounds like 2nd degree murder. I hope it does not drag the whole issue of stand your ground down with it because it is not so based on what has come out so far.

While I agree with the notion the Ramar of the Jungle music is aggravating, it is not justification to kill anyone not posing a real threat. The shooting happened in a section of town which is definitely not “the hood”.

38
posted on 11/28/2012 4:36:53 AM PST
by Mouton
(Voting is an opiate of the electorate. Nothing changes no matter who wins..)

Other than the fact that the published photo is one of the victim is wearing a hoodie, how is this Trayvon Martin redux?
Unless there are other pictures of the victim at age 8.
Big difference in fighting for your life at night while getting your head banged against the sidewalk and told you are going to be killed and blowing some fool away for turning up the volume on Snoop Dog.

We are only getting the side put out by Jordan’s friends. Dunn says he saw a gun in the SUV, and the SUV fled the scene after he shot.

If this is true, Dunn did not have any certainty whether he hit anyone or not. If a gun had been pulled on him, the other people in the SUV had plenty of time to dispose of it before the police searched the car.

Here is a link to a Gannet story where Dunn’s girlfreind says that the SUV was gone from the convenience store when she came back outside.

Gunning someone down at the quick stop and then fleeing the scene and spending the night in a motel, doesnt help one to appear like a man with a clean case of self-defense.

What was left out, was that Dunn claims that he was threatened with a gun, and that the SUV with the people who threatened him fled the scene after he shot. If this is so he could not be certain anyone was even hit, there was no "scene" left for him to show to police, and there was plenty of time and opportunity for Jordan's friends to sanitize the SUV and concoct a story that there never was any threat made against Dunn.

Regardless of circumstances, it all boils down to 1). Prosecutorial discretion; 2). Being able to convince a jury. As the Martin/Zimmerman case demonstrates. Nothing is certain after you pull the trigger. Well, actually, the only certainty is needing an attorney.

45
posted on 11/28/2012 5:33:55 AM PST
by PowderMonkey
(WILL WORK FOR AMMO)

I hope that the police have separated all the people who were in the SUV with Jordan, and got statements under oath from all of them. If a story was concocted in order to cove for criminal actions, you can usually determine it this way. Inconsistancies will creep in. Most groups of people cannot agree to enough details to hold a cover story together.

I wonder how much later they reported the shooting. Did they drive Jordan directly to the hospital? That is what you would ordinarily expect.

I see a big problem here in that Dunn did not contact the police right after the shooting.

The police tend to take the first people reporting as the “victim”. Dunn had a lot to consider. There was no body or vehicle to even show that there was a shooting. If he involves the police, he is likely to miss his son's wedding. He does not even know if anyone has been hit.

He should have reported it, to get his side on the record, even if it made him late for the wedding, because criminals often make up stories that put them in the best possible light.

Jordan's friends in the SUV had lots of time to consider their story, and plenty of motive to come up with a good one and to sanitize the scene to their advantage.

They had the whole Trayvon Martin episode to act as an example of what they should concoct.

In my opinion, Dunn will probably be spending the next several decades as a guest of the state. This shooting, as I said in an earlier post, has no similarities at all with the Trayvon/Zimmerman incident. The shooting of Trayvon Martin was, based on the evidence, possessive of sufficient facets for a good attorney to argue that it was viable self-defense. Actually one wouldn't even need a good attorney ...an average one would do. The only reason for a good attorney would be to mitigate against the bias-effect stemming from media coverage of that case.

This incident, however, is not in any way similar to the Trayvon/Zimmerman shooting. The shooter fired 8-9 times into an occupied vehicle, claiming that he did so because he felt threatened. Well, he needs to prove that he had a sufficient reason to feel threatened, because so far it looks like there was an argument (with expletives and threats most probably) and things got out of hand, and his response was to settle a verbal argument with gunfire. All that is coming out so far is his lawyer is claiming it was 'self defense' (and per the several articles I've read saying nothing more, with one saying there were negative comments about the Zimmerman case). Was there a gun in the other car? There could have been an RPG-7 with a miniaturized thermobaric warhead, but without evidence of its presence it was never there.

As it stands, even without the media getting involved, this man shot at a highschool kid because of an argument over loud music. Even without any extraneous 'acceleration' that is quite damming. Throw in the media coming in on the tailends of the Trayvon/Zimmerman case, with the same prosecutor, and this man is finished.

Add to this that he left the scene, which would make sense if he was leaving (as he claims ...or was it some FReeper here) to avoid the chance that the people in the car were 'thugs' and more thugs would be coming. That would have made sense ...had he left to go straight to a police station and report what happened. However, that's not what he did, was it? He leaves and goes to a motel. His number is jotted down by witnesses. Witnesses who saw a shooting where the shooter appears to have fled the scene (and I use 'appears' loosely since it does seem that he actually fled the scene). And he only turns himself up when the story hits the evening news, with a chance that witness descriptions of the shooter/vehicle came up. Also not good.

The only way this guy is avoiding prison time is if CCTV shows the occupants of the other vehicle brandishing a weapon. Somehow I doubt such evidence will come up, and I also doubt it happened that way. This was probably a 'nice person' who was having a bad day and events just pushed him over the edge, and he responded in a manner that I believe he wishes he didn't. Unfortunately in the eyes of the law he killed someone over what appears to be verbal disagreement due to loud music.

Completely dissimilar to the Trayvon/Zimmerman case, and to be honest I would say that prosecutors pray for such cases because they are open and shut for the most part. Unless some CCTV evidence comes out this man will be spending a lot of time warming up to Bubba and Tyrone.

Bottom line: Without evidence to the contrary, what you have here is a person who shot at a car based on a verbal argument. This is different from the Zimmerman case, and different from the other case of the black lady who shot a white man that was attacking her car. In both of those cases a good lawyer can mount an effective defense. In this case? I hope he is a praying man, because only a veritable miracle would have a chance of saving him. This is a prosecutor's dream case.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.